juanesky

According to Sen Schmuck (AKA Achumer), (D-NY) no, it was the war lords in Ramadi and Al-anbar province that made possible the peace the region now enjoys. It was none of us, nor the surge had anything to do. But what the hell, you already made up your mind. No point in telling you what some troops have seen in there, before and after the surge. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

But John, you should not expect an answer on that. He really believes that women in any given sharia law country, is better off than in any western democratic country. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

I would think that many would wonder why those who are so in favor of war never sign up for such but yell for more war and to send more troops. What is your lame excuse? Nah, too busy between deployments, but thanks for the thoughts. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

Or until Billvon would like this conflict to stop with aid of a magic wand. No need to us lethal force to bring it to sucessfull termination, becuase we really are bad, bad people. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

Again, you revise story as you see fit. Was there any need to stop WWII with the Japanese at all in your eyes? "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

Saudi Arabai, Qatar, UAE,Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait, Egypt, Pakistan, Morocco. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

As usual, you are way off with numbers in the A bomb victims. You take the revisionist position that there was absolutely no need to stop the war with the Japanese expediently, and also the great lenghts soldiers went about to take Iwo Jima, and Okinawa, and what those places, and confrontations really told us. You also conveniently forget about how many more people would have died if the war lasted 100 more days, and I'm referring all in the lands occupied by Japan at the time. Of course, that after the war, they just cried wolf, that it was horrible, and instead of condemning the military involved in a vast genocide in every single territory they occupied, they were now, the poor happless victims who idolized their war heros up until these days. War is horrendous, but after over 10+ years they took over land, and systematically raped, murder, tested people in really bad experiments by the millions, your figure of 350K, is the price they had to pay for it. Of course we know that you prefer to ignore the systemic killing of millions of innocent civilians, Chinese, Philipines, Vietnamese, etc. the Japanese manage to liquidate in their intent of setting a broader homeland. We learned the lessons, and hence they have not been used again. Too bad your John Kerry didn't have his way in 2004 so you could be vindicated don't you think? "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

Well, is this the same particular poster that actually does not realise that I have lived in a few Islamic countries to date.? I think you have an infatuation on people identifying certain terrorists as muslim, and see it as attack on all muslim. You keep talking the "we", while siding more and more in a condescending, and tragical ignorance on terrorism acts, perpetuated against innocents. You actually condone the methods used, only arbitrarily crying foul when terrorist killed are muslim, and their killers, are all but muslim. A few of us know where you stand on women's systemic abuse, and prohibition of rights, trying to poorly conceal it as difference in cultures, yet you don't want to say nothing about freedom of choice. You also conveniently don't agree with my explicit name calling on those islamo facist alqaida types, because you view these people probably as doing the right thing for muslims. It's all understandable where you side. Have a great day darius. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

He weeps at hirsohima and Nagasaki, but disregards Tokyo bombings that actually had more people killed. Maybe is a defeatist infatuation with the A bomb. But who knows. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

It's all good, apparently for Quade is ok to come in here and have total disregard for the forum rules, and in the belief that we actually don't know the meaning of the words he writes, doesn't man up on his "I'll join the NRA" challenge, when he gets called on it. Oh well, just another normal and usual anti-gun perspective. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

Well, according to one particular poster, this is just women actually standing up for their rights to be modest, and subserviant. Isn't that something? "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

Maybe you have been living in there too long. It is not acceptable, at least in the US. If it was for self defense reasons is ok, if not, it would be considered as assault and batterym but I doubt many women in here get beaten by their husband's egal. I seen father beating their daughters, for very stupid reasons, and it was clear to me that that was very acceptable behaviour for those muslims I saw. No one said a peep. But it was an area where sharia law was in effect. What you fail to see, as many others here is the issue of extreme islamic faith followers are the ones mainly incurring in these terror attacks, anything said about these particular individuals gets to be "an attack" on all muslim. Just like JJ and Sharpton playing the race card over here, regardless of merit As to your reference, "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

No, it is not, it is against the law, you actucally get arrested if you beat anyone, even the act of threateaning a woman, can get you a restraining order. What you "forget" to mention in your reply, that the difference is being a matter of choice, and the view that some wife-daughter-female beatings at Islamic law based countries are lawful under and for certain conditions, including death for adultery, while the male population gets better and lighter punishment for the same offences. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

Yes, only he has the right facts. As long as it does not point out the truths about what is simmering below the democratic islamic republics, it's all good. Women have the right to be beaten at men's thoughts. It's all good. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

What number is that? Members of the NRA? Some figure provided by the NRA? Absolutely nobody knows how many guns there are in the US let alone gun owners. Speaking of which, when are you joining the NRA?, for insulting John in the other thread? "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

I'll vote for you, but just make sure you include legislation to promote kaipirihnas....lol "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

You were right. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

And make sure you let me know when you start getting your NRA magazine ok? "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

Calling someone a parrot or parroting is. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

I was going to respond to that, you beat me to it. He has better info than us, apparently. Anything we've seen there, or done there definitely does not count to his superior resources. Any jumps lately? Blue skies! "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

There you go, one of each, 1 for not playing the ball, 1 for insisting he is just parroting, and not debating his point of the Media bias against guns. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

You shoulr read about the judge that sued a Korean cleaners, for losing his pants, $57mil. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

Off course, your comment does not come as a surprise to few around here. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

Soliciting sex with a minor? Should I have any in the future, I feel confident in my ability to make them capable of dealing with the world around them. The real kids that are running off with these guys aren't ones that have a family life at home. I'm not going to be one of those irrational parents pissing over the constitution out of fear. If you are, then you have no right to bitch about Bush anymore. Tell me which crime is committed by showing up at a house? "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

LOL. 100 % Wrong? Well, in my original response to your post, you were clearly wording your comment in the tone of "the culturally advance countries, instead of the US. I have no high horse to ride, maybe a big SUVm but not a horse. I find it fascinating that you will conveniently play down the situation in India-Pakistan (mind you UK meddling), Israel-Palestine (again direct UK participation), I understand that you want to make us believe that those hot spots are just figment of our imagination right? After WWI and II, it was clearly that our European allies, were more concern on keeping their colonies intact, can we say those places aforementioned? including the reminisence of the Ottoman empire, in the middle east, Africa, we can even include Vietnam, Iran, Iraq. Maybe it is that in Europe they tend not to teach those historical facts anymore, because it is convenient to hide what your govts did, while at the same time approving of your beloved royalty. But some apparently are in need of reeducation in history. Have a great day buddy and blue skies. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon